Back to: The Wiki; Documentation; Newspapers; Ogdensburg Journal
Case File: Conroy, Kate née Grundt (1896)
[Link to original] – Page 4, Column 4
CONROY BEFORE THE COURT! --- The Great Murder Trial Commenced. --- SIX JURORS CHOSEN IN FOUR HOURS. MONDAY --- Alexander Flora Returns to His Family
The trial of Frank Conroy, for wife-murder, committed on the 20th of last May, commenced at Canton yesterday. A few minutes before 2 o’clock the doors of the court house opened to admit the crowd of impaneled jurors, witnesses and spectators who had assembled to be present at this trial. One hundred and eighty three jurymen had been impaneled and they alone nearly filled the audience portion of the court room.
District Attorney Hale and Assistant District Attorney Hurlbut were in readiness to handle the case for the people. John C. Keeler, of Canton, and George Morton, of Ogdensburg, appeared as attorneys for defendant.
Judge Russell called the court to order promptly at 2 o’clock. The clerk was instructed to call the roll of jurors and 159 out of 183 responded. Nearly all of those who were absent had sent excuses which were entertained. No penalty was imposed upon any person for absence by the presiding judge. Fourteen others were excused upon showing sufficient reason why they should not serve.
[next section regarding the bigamy case of Alexander Flora ommitted from this transcription]
DRAWING OF THE JURORS
The first juror drawn was Addison Ekey, of the town of Madrid. He did not know either the defendant or the defendant’s attorneys. He had no conscientious scruples against capital punishment. He had read about the murder, but had formed no opinion which could not be changed upon the testimony of the witnesses. He considered himself as free to form an opinion as though he had not read about it in the papers. The use of a knife as a weapon would make no difference with him in his verdict; neither would the fact that the murdered party was the defendant’s wife; neither would the action of the grand jury in its indictment. He would give the defendant the benefit of any doubt in the matter, and believed that he could render an impartial verdict. No objection was interposed and Mr. Ekey was sworn.
Henry Murphy was drawn next. He had no conscientious scruples about the death penalty. He did not know the defendant or his attorneys. He had read an account of the murder in the St. Lawrence Republican and had formed an opinion which would take considerable evidence to change. Did not know what there should be a greater weight of evidence in this case in order to convict than would be necessary in a civil suit. Had a decided objection against the defense of insanity.
Judge Russell immediately sustained the objection of defendant’s attorneys, and remarked that they did not wish any person to act as a juror who would wish to execute an insane man.
John J. Murray, of Brasher Falls, had no conscientious scruples about the death penalty. He had read about the case, however, and had formed an opinion which could not easily be changed. The challenge of the defendant was sustained and Mr. Murry was excused.
T. D. Shepard, of Wegatchie, did not know that the penalty for murder in the first degree was punishable by death. As Mr. Shepard is hard of hearing, he was excused.
Leander Chase was excused because he had rheumatism in his back.
William Brown, of Lisbon Center, did not know defendant of defendant’s attorneys. He had no objection to the death penalty. He had read about the case in the St. Lawrence Republican, but had formed no opinion which could not be altered by evidence. Had no objection to insanity as a defense. The fact that the weapon used was a knife, or that the murdered party was defendant’s wife, or that the grand jury indicted the prisoner for murder in the first degree, would make no difference in the verdict he would render. It would make no difference what his neighbors thought. He did not know either District Attorney Hale or Hurlbut. Understood that the prisoner was to have the benefit of every doubt. No objection was interposed, so Mr. Borwn was sworn.
W. C. Berry, of Ogdensburg, knew the defendant and had sold him liquor. He had read about the case and had talked about it with Mr. Morton. He did not think that he would make a jair juror, as he already had formed an opinion. Mr. Berry was excused.
Oscar V. Veitch, of Madrid Springs, had no scruples against the death penalty. He had read about it in the county papers, but had formed no opinion that could not be changed. He had an objection to the defense of insanity in the present case, but thought that he could form a just opinion if sufficient testimony was rendered.
Preferred challenge was overruled by the court, but Mr. Keeler entered a preemptory challenge. Mr. Veitch was excused.
James M. Thrall, of Gouverneur, ahd no conscientious scruples against the death
[Link to original] – Page 4, Column 5
penalty. He had read about the case, but through that the could render a just verdict notwithstanding. If evidence was evenly balance he could give the defendant the benefit of the doubt. He had no objection to an insanity defense. No objection was interposed, so Mr. Thrall was sworn.
James Miller, of Flackville, had formed an opinion that could not be changed by any evidence which the defense could bring forward. Mr. Miller was excused.
Henry McKnight, of Waddington, had formed a very decided opinion in the case. He would require convincing testimony of a physician before he would entertain an insanity defense. Both parties interposed a challenge, so Mr. McKnight was excused.
J. Allen Harper, of Lisbon, had read about the case, but had formed no decided opinion. He thought he would be able to render an impartial verdict. Had no conscientious scruples about the death penalty. Did not object to an insanity defense. The weapon, the victim, or the action of the grand jury would make no difference in his judgment. No objection was interposed, so Mr. Harper was sworn.
King S. Root, of Colton, had no scruples against the death penalty. Had read about the case in the newspapers, but had formed no opinion which testimony could not change. Had no objection to tan insanity defense. No objection was interposed; Mr. Root was sworn.
E. B. Capron, of Ogdensburg, was excused without examination.
The attorneys here agreed to excuse all Ogdensburg men from acting on the jury. This was done so as to expedite the examination.
Charles Chambers, of North Lawrence, was excused on account of sickness in the family.
Fred Freeman, of Talcville, had considerable objection to the death penalty. He was peremptorily challenged by District Attorney Hale.
George F. Spears, of Lisbon Center, did not think he could render an impartial decision because of what he had read and heard. He was excused.
James Leach, of Hatfield, had some objections to the death penalty. He was peremptorily challenged by District Attorney Hale.
Nelson Lauber, of Lawrenceville, had read about the case in the St. Lawrence Republican, but had formed no definite opinion. He had no conscientious scruples as regards the death penalty. He had no objection to an insanity defense. No objection was interposed. Mr. Lauber was sworn.
E. L. Hutchins, of Massena, though he would render an impartial verdict on the evidence given, but he was peremptorily challenged by Mr. Keeler.
Buel Wright had formed a definite opinion. He did not object to an insanity defense. He was peremptorily challenged, however, by Mr. Keeler.
The trial was then adjourned until Tuesday morning at nine o’clock. Six jurors had been chosen out of 21 persons drawn from the panel.
The defendant Conroy sat by his counsel during the examination of jurors and watched the proceedings with nervous anxiety. He occasionally leaned towards Mr. Morton and suggested a question to be asked of a juror.
—-
CANTON, Aug. 4 – The court reconvened at 9 o’clock this morning and at 11 o’clock 37 men in all had been drawn from the panel and eight had been accepted and sworn as jurors. Of these, George Andrews, of Buck’s Bridge, and Charles H. Risley, of Hermon, were sworn this morning. Nothing more than the selection of a jury will be done today.
